The Looked Left when Trump went Right. the Wall BEGINS

It appears while fighting healthcare reform bills on Obamacare, they Democrats lost sight of Trump's plans to Build a Wall and failed to act.
Meanwhile Trump supporters managed to pass a Titanic Cash Cow to his Military and Wall, which allowed him to make good on both his claim to make the
US military the most powerful in the world and his campaign to build a wall.

It appears while fighting healthcare reform bills on Obamacare, they Democrats lost sight of Trump's plans to Build a Wall and failed to act.
Meanwhile Trump supporters managed to pass a Titanic Cash Cow to his Military and Wall, which allowed him to make good on both his claim to make the
US military the most powerful in the world and his campaign to build a wall.

The house approved the spending. Now the bill has to pass the senate. Then the president has to sign.

The $1.6 billion would be specifically allocated for physical barriers in the Rio Grande Valley of Texas and in San Diego, Calif.

The Hill Anyone familiar with
the actual budget process knows that when the house "allocated" any funds, that does not mean squat. The congress then has to "appropriate" those
funds for any money to be spent.
In short, many projects have had allocations, but no appropriations. In most instances, the appropriation is very small at first, and if things work
out well, later appropriations are made. But, a multi-year project like the Wall is subject to politics, so they could get some Wall "seed money,"
then the mid-terms roll around, another party gets in, and the funds are cut off.

Appropriation is a law that authorizes the expenditure of funds for a given purpose.

A bill that specifies how much money can be spent on
a given federal program. Reviewed by Appropriations subcommittees in both the House and Senate, appropriations bills must also be approved by the full
House and Senate before being signed by the president to become law.

Well, it's not really surprising they would do that, since those promises got them elected.

Peace and security are only possible from a position of strength, so a strong military is critical to survival. Only the fringe is opposed to a strong
military and even many if not most on the Left are for a strong military. It would be suicidal to not be in that camp. It's irrational to be against
that, no matter what side a person is on.

The Wall is debatable. It may or may not be the best way to control the border, that remains to be seen. It is also rational though to want to protect
against terrorists, human traffickers and drug cartels. Drug cartels are out of control and human trafficking is said to be on the rise, so the old
status quo is not exactly working and that screams that something needs to be done.

The highest priority of government is to protect it's citizens is it not? I think this is the wrong thing to be against. It's at the very least the
least logical thing to be against. To be opposed to this is to be opposed to doing something about drug cartels, human traffickers and a secure
country. It's hard to see it any other way.

While I did not support Trump and my opinion of him just keeps going down, I'd never fault anyone in office for making national security and the
security of citizens a priority. There are dangerous people going back and forth across the border and the world is not even remotely a safe place.
The idea of a weak military is not rational.

Doesn't this have to go to Congress now? Also, isn't that "wall money" already set aside for the current wall/fence repairs and upgrades, and not for
building Trump's wall, per say?

You're correct.

But that doesn't make Trump look like some crazy like a fox 4D chess player.

Read the transcript of his speech to the Boy Scouts. That's not the talk of a chess player/strategist.

A lot of us left-wingers knew about this budget item but it's not up for vote right now. We do know that there's been some marking of land by the
Army Corps of Engineers and at least ONE attempt by one of their contractors to clear land in a designated environmentally protected zone here in
Texas.

Obamacare, however, is the active issue for now. When this comes up in the budget debates, you can expect to see more noise from us.

Why stop there? Let's just go ahead and legalize anything that's proving difficult to enforce laws on or has a contingency of left-leaners who are
sympathetic to the plight of current criminals. Rape? Make it legal... Theft? That's a tough nut to crack, so best to just adopt a Chinese auction
style law that allows folks to grab whatever they want. Corruption and bribery? Hell now, we all know politicians and people in power are gonna
grift, why fight the tide of the river?

No, all of this is ridiculous BS. Our best defense on the border is to ACTUALLY DEFEND THE BORDER. The Wall is a good idea to incorporate into that
defense, as would be stationing national guardsmen along that wall, armed and ready to resolve illegal crossings with a degree of force which will
ultimately serve as the best deterrent known to mankind.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.